Guddu @ Virendra Pal v. State of U.P

Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44506 of 2023 Applicant :- Guddu @ Virendra Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hirdesh Kumar Yadav,Sushma Yadav Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.251 of 2023 at Police Station-Sarai Lakhansi, District-Mau under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 308, 304 and 452 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 05.08.2023. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 05.10.2023. The following arguments made by Shri Ajeet Singh, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Ms. Sushma Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶1Vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant in the assault.

¶2The applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who inflicted the fatal injuries on the person of the deceased.

¶3The applicant was not nominated as one of the principal offender in the statements of the injured witnesses.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to co-accused-Akhilesh Pal and Ramniwas Pal who have been granted bail by this Court on 02.11.2023 and 11.10.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.44678 of 2023 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.37715 of 2023.

¶5The role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused persons namely, Sandeep Pal, Pradeep Pal, Amit Pal who have been nominated as the principal offenders who inflicted the injuries by the injured witnesses.

¶6The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶7The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Guddu @ Virendra Pal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings. The trial court has also to be conscious of the rights of the accused persons and is under obligation of law to ensure that all expeditious, necessary and coercive measures as per law are adopted to ensure the presence of witnesses. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel. The learned trial court shall issue summons by regular process as per Section 62 Cr.P.C. and also by registered post as provided under Section 69 Cr.P.C. to expedite the trial. The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel. The police authorities shall ensure that warrants or any coercive measures as per law taken out by the learned trial court to ensure that the attendance of the witnesses are promptly executed. The Superintendent of Police, Mau shall file an affidavit before the trial court on the date fixed regarding status of execution of the warrants/service of summons taken out by the learned trial court. In case there is a failure on part of the police authorities to execute the warrants or other coercive measures, the Superintendent of Police, Mau shall state the reasons for the same in the said affidavit and also show the steps taken to execute the warrants. The Superintendent of Police, Mau shall simultaneously inform the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Varanasi Zone, about the aforesaid failure of the police authorities in the first instance to execute the warrants and coercive measures issued by the learned trial court. If required, the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Varanasi Zone, may issue an appropriate directions to ensure that the warrants issued are promptly executed by the learned trial court. The delay in execution of warrants and consequent absence of witnesses is one of the principal causes of delays in criminal trials and has to be addressed effectively by all stakeholders. The trial judge shall submit a fortnightly report on the progress of trial and the steps taken to comply with this order to the learned District Judge. A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Mau by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX. Order Date :- 7.11.2023 Ashish Tripathi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad